A 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 that I got in about 1996 as the kit lens with my A2. Then I got a 100-300 f/4-5.6 about a year later and a couple after that, I bought a 35/2. Still have all three. Don't use the zooms anymore but the 35 gets regular use on my 5D3. I didn't like it too much on my 5D2 as I could never get satisfactory AF, even with AFMA, but the lens has come back to life on my 5D3 and focuses spot on. Great little travel lens.

I don't have it any more, but I used to have an EF 300mm f/2.8 which dated from November 1987. It looked it too, being "well used". Got the Sigma 120-300 OS now and that does everything it did and more.

I also have a 50mm 1.8. Date code UC0402, so April 1988. Bought it with a A2e in Europe. In 1988 I think. Lens is in near mint condition even though I used it until about two years ago when I bought a 50 1.4 while they were on sale. Yeah, it's loud, but that's about the only drawback (until Canon comes out with their next gen 50mm lenses).

I also have a 70-210 f4 which I bought maybe a year later, but it's on loan with a cousin and I don't know the date code. It's also has pretty poor image quality, so I don't miss it...

50mm 1.8 I bought new in 1984 with my "Olympic Edition" AE-1 Program. Still have the camera too

OP's question was about EF lenses. The lens you mention is obviously FD.

However, you reminded me of the days that I was (ignorant and) about ready for my first SLR. It was 1981 and I was thinking Canon A-1 when the salesman talked me into getting Konica Autoreflex TC. However, when I lost (literally) a Sigma 70-210 a friend talked me into changing system in general (I only had the Konica with a 40mm 1.. So I got EOS 620 with 35-105 f/3.5-4.5 100-300 5.6 and 420EZ.

I have the older 80-200 2.8 all metal "drainpipe" from 1989 (which I just found out recently is perfect for IR photography!), and the old 28-70 2.8 ~1993 all metal as well. The AF switch just broke on the 28-70 so I might be taking it apart or getting it fixed locally soon, but the 80-200 was fixed last year after I bought it and is a great lens!

I have a 50/1.8 Mk 1 with a date code UB0200, so that's February of 1987. Pristine condition.

It's for sale if anyone is interested.

+1 Mine is also UB0200. It looks even more pristine, if that's possible, than yours.

Looking at the picture perhaps "pristine" isn't the right word for my lens. Considering the thing is 26 years old and was not stored as a museum piece, it's in pretty amazing condition. There are a couple minor scuff marks and there is evidence on the contacts that it has actually been mounted on a camera. It's still in better shape than my 2-year old 24-105. I doubt there are many Mk2 plastic fantastic versions still surviving after 20+ years.

I have a 50/1.8 Mk 1 with a date code UB0200, so that's February of 1987. Pristine condition.

It's for sale if anyone is interested.

+1 Mine is also UB0200. It looks even more pristine, if that's possible, than yours.

Looking at the picture perhaps "pristine" isn't the right word for my lens. Considering the thing is 26 years old and was not stored as a museum piece, it's in pretty amazing condition. There are a couple minor scuff marks and there is evidence on the contacts that it has actually been mounted on a camera. It's still in better shape than my 2-year old 24-105. I doubt there are many Mk2 plastic fantastic versions still surviving after 20+ years.

It says something about relative build quality when people rather buy a 23+ years old occasion at a premium over a newly manufactured, all plastic model. I payed 1.3x what the MkII costs and have never regretted it